Monthly Archives: December 2012

Constitutional Law professor proposes government by Calvinball*

What can one say about a person who has taught Constitutional Law for 40 years and has learned nothing?

Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse. Instead of arguing about what is to be done, we argue about what James Madison might have wanted done 225 years ago.

He makes believe that if we just liberated ourselves from the Constitution, we could get the work done. If we had no standards, no limits on the Government, no actual governmental structure, we would be able to get things done. Why is it that tyrants everywhere seem to conflate “the good of the people” with “government getting things done?”

it is hard to take seriously the claim by the Constitution’s defenders that we would be reduced to a Hobbesian state of nature if we asserted our freedom from this ancient text.

That’s not a claim, Mr. Seidman. That’s a personal guarantee. Your unswerving loyalty to the Constitution does not protect me. It protects you. Because as long as you are sticking to the rules that we’ve agreed upon, I have to stick to those rules as well. The moment you decide to ditch the Constitution and start making up the rules as you go along, the rest of us will feel free to make up a few rules of our own. I can assure you that you won’t like them. 

When might makes right, as surely it will when we have no Constitution to describe the limits of our government, I will take great pains to be among the mighty. Best for all concerned that we keep muddling along under the Constitution, alert for would be tyrants on either side who wish to exceed that document’s authority. It’s much safer that way.


Update: Someone says it better.


Would that some would heed these words.

How do they know each other?

You start to wonder what criteria criminals use for victim selection. Take this one, for example.

All three are accused of trying to rob (Victim) on Sunday in a room at the Quality Inn on Jim Johnson Road, off Exit 49 on Interstate 95, Davis said.

(Suspect 3) had just left (Victim)’s room when, moments later, (Suspect 1) and (Suspect 2) Walker burst through the door that had been left ajar, police said.

(Suspect 1) pulled out a knife, but (Victim) grabbed the blade and got the knife away from him.

Despite the cuts on his hands, (Victim) stabbed both men, who ran away, Davis said.

Why was he targeted? If he was from the area, why was he at the hotel?

Suspect 1

Suspect 3


I will leave it to you to speculate how this all came about. I will say that it seems amazing to me that two convicted felons managed to find another felon to try to rob.

For those who wonder how I found the victim despite his extremely common name, I looked at the initial police report provided online by the Fayetteville Police. The case number is 2012043479 on the date 12-23-2012.

If gun control works so well, how did he get all of these?

So the gun grabbers tell us that if we just banned some guns we would be able to keep them out of the hands of the criminals.

Police early Friday charged a convicted robber with illegally having two shotguns and four handguns when they went to his home to arrest him on numerous drug charges.

A convicted robber?


Oh, you mean a career criminal who still can’t keep out of trouble.

So someone explain to me how it is that a convicted felon, who is banned from so much as touching a gun managed to get a shotgun and pistols in 4 different calibers. This guy can’t keep his fingers off of your stuff, off of drugs, or off of guns and the gun grabbers are trying to tell me that one more law will change all of that?

More proof that guns only lead to violence?

Another shooting in Raleigh!

A man was arrested Friday and charged in a Thursday night shooting at 18 S. Fisher St., Raleigh police said.

Is this yet more proof that law abiding citizens should be barred from having guns? What could have been no more than a fist fight ended up being a shooting?



Or is it more proof that the gun control laws just don’t stop criminals from getting guns and shooting each other?

They face it but they won’t get it

When you choose an action, you choose the consequences of that action.

As a clearer picture began to form around last week’s fatal shooting of a 19-year-old community college student in downtown Wilmington, two of the alleged perpetrators admitted to playing a role in the crime, but pointed to another as the triggerman.

And when you choose to associate with violent felons, you choose to associate with their violent crimes.

Suspected Triggerman

The story says that the other conspirators, with the exception of the 17-year-old, face the death penalty. Unfortunately NC hasn’t executed anyone in a long time.

At least he wasn’t shot

The gun grabbers are probably pissed about this one.

Three people were charged in the fatal stabbing of a 21-year-old Conover man that the victim’s family said stemmed from an armed robbery.

A dead body and no gun!

Suspect 2

Suspect 3

But no shortage of felons.

(Victim’s Father) said investigators told him that his son interacted with the three suspects while he was visiting his girlfriend Friday in Charlotte. “People need to know it’s not something that just happened. It was totally set up. They planned it, and they took advantage of his generosity and trust,”

I’m not surprised. Criminals committing crime is about par for the course. It’s sad and sickening, but not surprising.

Ignore the Constitution and look at the practical reasons

Yes, I said to ignore the Constitution.

People have First Amendment rights. They can pretty much say whatever they like about whatever they want. I’m cool with that. In fact, I’m pretty proud of that. But let’s ignore the Constitutional argument and just look at the practical argument.

Much has been made about the petition campaign to deport Piers Morgan.

As far as I’m concerned, we need to keep him right where he is, reminding American firearm owners with his outrageous disarmament advocacy just exactly why we had a Lexington and Concord in 1775.


Of course he has the right to be a complete and total douche bag. Even complete and total douche bags have Constitutional rights. But beyond that, by being exactly who he is, Piers Morgan is providing us a service. He’s reminding us of why our forefathers shot the Kings men and sent his officers home.

Most anti-gun people are sophisticated enough to avoid outright calls for citizen disarmament. They know that calls for gun bans cause the rest of us to get mad and fight. Piers Morgan, not being from around here, says openly what the gun grabbers are thinking. He screams and shouts from his well defended ivory tower, compounding stupidity with sneering condescension. He has turned himself into the perfect representation of everything that regular Americans hate while at the same time dragging the gun grabbers out from under the rocks into the light.

Regular Americans get pissed off when someone claims to be their moral superior. Regular Americans get a bit upset when obvious foreigners lecture us about how much better it is overseas. Piers Morgan has managed to hit all the buttons at once. Probably because he’s so busy being culturally superior that he hasn’t even bothered to learn anything at all about American culture. He probably doesn’t even think we have a culture.

So yes, let’s ignore the fact that Piers Morgan has a Constitutional right to be a complete and total douche bag. From a practical standpoint he is the gun grabbers worst enemy. We should let him stay just for that reason.

New rule, don’t live in assisted living with known arsonists

I guess that old arsonists have to live somewhere, but when the day comes that I have to place my parents in assisted living I don’t want arsonists living with them.

A resident of the Brookridge Assisted Living center with a history of arson has been charged with setting fire to the facility last week, displacing 15 other residents.

I’ve never seen the attraction to fire outside of something to keep me warm or cook my food.


Of course, other people have different opinions. I just don’t want them living with my parents.

So I guess we need to discuss costs

So DiFi wants to “buy” my AR?

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said that she and other gun control advocates are considering a law that would create a program to purchase weapons from gun owners, a proposal that could be compulsory.

I guess that means we need to discuss what my AR (and yours) will cost her and her minions. I hope she doesn’t think my saying it will cost rivers of blood and oceans of tears is some sort of hyperbole.

There is no question that the local police could easily sneak up on me while I am sleeping and take me by surprise. The problem is not the initial gun grab. It’s the bloody aftermath. I suspect that some of the police agencies are making some calculations. They will have to calculate how much they want to keep their jobs and their lives.

Once something like a mass gun grab starts, each and every police officer will become a target. And that’s sad, really. I kind of like my police chief. He’s a cop, and prone to the sort “cop attitude” that they all get, but a likeable enough fellow in his own way. If we can’t get through this crisis with our Constitution intact, I certainly hope that he and his agency have the strength of character to abide by their oaths. If he remembers his oath he will have nothing to fear from the citizens.

The people like DiFi had better hope they do. Because while the immediate targets would be the enforcers, the very next targets would be the people giving the orders. And you can bet that while these order givers will have security, some of that security will turn out to be on our side.

Now we see the violence inherent in the system

About a week ago I posted a story about “Felon Seeking Bullets.” The Raleigh Police have unraveled the story and arrested their suspects

 Two men arrested on drug-possession charges 10 minutes after and three miles away from where a man was shot outside the Carlton Place Apartments now are accused of assault, robbery and conspiracy in that case, and another man is accused of being their getaway driver.

So it looks pretty straightforward. The two of them are accused of shooting the victim and robbing him of $2,000.

Suspect 1


Isn’t it surprising how often it’s a felon doing the shooting? It’s almost as if crime isn’t random at all. People breaking the law selling drugs can’t go to the police or the courts to solve their disagreements so they shoot and rob each other instead. This sort of environment would select for and reward people who were vicious, ruthless, and lack empathy towards their fellow man. People who hesitated to hurt others to get their way would lose to those who didn’t hesitate.

I think that the best solution for everyone is to legalize drugs. I keep telling people that Jim Beam and Jack Daniels don’t shoot each other or hijack each others trucks. The only reason that drug dealers do that is because we’ve pushed the entire drug trade outside the law leaving it to the psychos who thing that sort of behavior is appropriate.